For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 111
#1780744
No connexion other than finding them generally the best online source of fact checked news. If course, there are those who equate 'accurate quoting of source X with accurate attribution' as 'blindly supporting source X', likely to be those who oppose X, whatever the topic.

On topics where I do have specialist knowledge, I have got to know a number of specialist reporters (or those presented by their employers/editors as such). At one stage I had to deal with them directly for my employer. I found the BBC ones by far the most accurate on the topic overall and in the representation of what I had been trying to convey. Obviously, others'experience may be different.

I hold no brief at all for BBC 'presenters', however; nor, in my experience, do it's specialist reporters! Fortunately, the most notorious for misrepresenting them has retired... :roll:
MachFlyer liked this
#1780748
kanga wrote:I found the BBC ones by far the most accurate on the topic overall and in the representation of what I had been trying to convey...

...I hold no brief at all for BBC 'presenters', however; nor, in my experience, do it's specialist reporters!

Roger Harrabin, the person you quoted earlier, has no qualifications whatsoever outside "English" [one assumes 'Journalism'] other than an "honorary" one from Cranfield, yet writes as an "expert" in matters "green", environment, and now Hydrogen Fuel Cells.

Quite a leap from a smoky English common room... Is he one of the fabled "specialist reporters"?

:roll: :cyclopsani:
#1780754
eltonioni wrote:Here's an actual firm doing actual things with hydrogen fuel > http://www.itm-power.com


Interesting -- although they should ask for their money back from whoever wrote the opening "What is Hydrogen?" paragraph on their website.
#1780755
CherokeePete wrote:..
Roger Harrabin, . Is he one of the fabled "specialist reporters"?

:


.. not one with whom I've had personal dealings, nor one on whose competence or formal qualifications (or dearth thereof) I am competent to comment. As ever, welcome critique from those who are so competent
#1780758
I have "critiqued' him, based upon his own Wiki entry which if wrong I assume he would correct... bit of an idiot if he libelled or misrepresented himself ;)

I'm sure in the 1960s and possibly even the 1970s your romantic vision of the bbc and its impartial, non-partisan, reasonably well educated reporters and supporters existed however the reality is that in 2020 that is not the case, anecdotally, factually no matter the "qualification" of those so commenting.

I look nostalgically at things of old (1980s and 90s) and cannot see anything wrong with them either so it isn't personal! 8)

:cyclopsani:
#1780769
CherokeePete wrote:..
I'm sure in the 1960s and possibly even the 1970s your romantic vision of the bbc and its impartial, non-partisan, reasonably well educated reporters and supporters existed however the reality is that in 2020 that is not the case, anecdotally, factually no matter the "qualification" of those so commenting...


my pertinent experience is much more recent than that, and I claim it is not 'romantic vision' but based on my own specialist knowledge in judging the contemporary BBC reporting; and those BBC relevant specialists are still in their roles, and still seeming to me to be sound and coherent within their assigned topics. But I have and claim no competence to judge whether the article (on hydrogen vehicles) which I cited is soundly based or sensibly written for its intended audience. Happy to hear from any Forumite who is qualified to comment whether it is (or, of course, isn't).
#1780772
This discussion feels like "shoot the messenger" rather than the message.

On the message, hydrogen has advantages, but it requires a lot of electricity to produce it without using fossil fuels (so its fairly expensive), would need national infrastructure, the tanks are heavy and bulky to be fitted in cars, which means most cars produced have tanks capable of similar ranges to the current breeds of electric car ( https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/buyi ... ogen-cars/ ).

I suspect that a greater overall environmental benefit could be had by blending hydrogen into the current natural gas network, which there is currently research into doing. All condensing gas boilers manufactured and installed after 1996 are able to run on gas which contains up to 23% hydrogen https://www.boilerguide.co.uk/articles/ ... al-heating and its possible to produce duel fuel boilers - which can take either natural gas or hydrogen. Few gas boilers last more than 25 years so converting any excess electricity into hydrogen makes sense.
Now what did we do with our new nuclear power stations and tidal barrages to produce clean excess electricity?
#1780780
kanga wrote:I have and claim no competence to judge whether the article (on hydrogen vehicles) which I cited is soundly based or sensibly written for its intended audience

Agreed. You do not. So back to my original statement about the need to "cite" bbc articles all the time as if they are the fount of all knowledge when they are not. Anyway, I fear I have contributed to dragging this discussion away from hydrogen fuel cells and other alternative car fuels for long enough and thank the others for their indulgence whilst we established a baseline.

:cyclopsani:
#1780786
CherokeePete wrote:So back to my original statement about the need to "cite" bbc articles all the time as if they are the fount of all knowledge when they are not. Anyway, I fear I have contributed to dragging this discussion away from hydrogen fuel cells and other alternative car fuels for long enough and thank the others for their indulgence whilst we established a baseline.

BBC is probably the most "neutral" and regulated source of general journalistic output available in the UK at the moment. It is far from perfect and still has clear biases - but as it isn't behind a paywall and is accessible to all. Whether you'll win an argument by quoting a BBC article or not is entirely a different question but I suggest they generally provide a useful discussion starter or source of base information allowing you to delve deeper and get more facts. However this probably isn't the topic to continue discussing this.
#1780817
@kanga Thanks for posting.

Once generating hydrogen is sorted by being made by using excess leccy it will no doubt find its niche, but it won't be what web will driving us or flying with.
kanga liked this
#1781103
Last night I watched 'Vintage Voltage' - a classic Fiat 500 had it's petrol engine replaced with an electric motor, powered by three Tesla batteries. And an extra 12v battery - why can't the existing car electrics run off the Tesla batteries (through a suitable transformer/converter?). I'm certainly no electrical engineer, but it just seems odd that you need an additional 12v battery.

I've also just seen that the the Nissan Leaf (and I guess other EVs) also use an additional 12v, heavy lead acid battery to run the ancillaries. Can anyone enlighten me as to why?

Would this be the same for electric aircraft as well?

Many thanks!
#1781106
All electric vehicles are like that.
Some of it is safety: it allows the traction battery to be isolated when the car is off and it is much safer to have 12V around the car (body is the common return) than 400V.
Some of it is efficiency. Much more efficient to have a constant storage of 12V occasionally topped up rather than a permanently turned on transformer stepping down the 400V traction battery.
Mr Bags, Colonel Panic, kanga and 1 others liked this
  • 1
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 111